Unlike Whore John R. MacArthur, I called out Barack in real time. I can do so right now. I'm not sniveling coward like John is. In fact, he's just one of the "sons of the ass licking dying regime" (to quote "Marat/Sade" as sung by Judy Collins).

He's had how many years as the owner of Harper's to lead a charge against Barack but instead he and his writers (like Scott Horton) have fondled Barack's balls.

He's got a lot of nerve.

He's a pig. He really is a pig. That's also how he'll be seen.

He pulled this anti-Hillary crap in 2007 and 2008 as well.

He put a War Hawk and a Corporatist into the White House and he refuses to take accountability because, truth be told, he's not American.

He's American-French.

Sometimes, he votes in France's elections, sometimes in ours.

In other words, he dabbles.

His mind dribbles.

I didn't vote for Hillary in the 2008 primaries. I voted for Mike Gravel.

I knew Mike from the days of Vietnam.

I knew if he said it, he meant it.

I couldn't say that about the rest the Democratic Party offered.

But I love how sexist John thinks he's going to go after Hillary -- or get everyone else to -- when he doesn't have the guts to take on Barack.

I won't vote for Hillary in 2016.

She's unfit to be president. She made that clear in January 2013 when she appeared before the Senate and snarled, "What difference does it make!"

That's what happens when she's supposed to be accountable?

She scream like a banshee and makes insulting remarks about the dead?

No.

I won't support her. I doubt the TCI community will. C.I. has called Hillary out -- for that hearing and other things and I know C.I.'s going to point out the accountability issue -- beyond Benghazi. It's much larger and the press has ignored it but it goes to her being unfit for office.

Even freaks like Sexist John MacArthur and Fox News haven't caught on.

But C.I. noticed it in real time and pointed out that if Hillary didn't address it as Secretary of State, she would like someone who skirts the Constitution.

Hillary never addressed it.

So if she declares she's running, it's one of the issues C.I. will address at The Common Ills.

Will Hillary get the nomination?

She might. But I don't think she deserves it.

Nor do I think America's done anything to warrant suffering under her 'leadership.'

But notice, I'm not an idiot tossing out names like Elizabeth Warren.

Warren is no hero. She was over TARP and waited until the money was gone to blow the whistle. She was a Republican until she wanted to run for Congress.

Friday, March 14, 2014. Chaos and violence, continue, Nouri's big mouth
brings political rival Moqtada al-Sadr back to Iraq, the State Dept
finally finds a voice to condemn Nouri's 9-year-old child brides
proposal, the press picks up on the issue today, rumors circulate of
Nouri holding warrants ready to serve on his political rivals, a
Saturday protest is planned to rebuke him, the United Kingdom loses a
strong anti-war voice, and much more.

Last Saturday, Iraqi women protested in Baghdad against Nouri
al-Maliki's proposed bill which would allow father's to marry off
daughters as young as nine-years-old, strip away the need for consent to
sex, and would strip custodial rights from mothers. The US press has
worked overtime to ignore the protest and the bill Nouri's sent to
Parliament. Today, it finally got some attention in the US press.

Iraq is seriously considering passing a new law called Jaafari Personal
Status Law which would allow girls as young as 8-years-old to legally
marry. The law itself actually reads girls age 9, but because Iraq
follows the lunar Islamic calendar their age 9 actually equals the age
of 8 years and 8 months. The law also mentions this is the same age that
girls reach puberty. Is this their justification for allowing such
young girls to be forced into marriage?Making matters even worse, the same reads that a husband can have sex
with his wife with or without her consent. This means that if an
8-year-old gets married, she could raped by her husband and it would not
be illegal.

The Associated Press' Sameer N. Yacoub and Sinan Salaheddin offer a
lengthy report which includes: "Also under the proposed measure, a
husband can have sex with his wife
regardless of her consent. The bill also prevents women from leaving the
house without their husband's permission, would restrict women's rights
in matters of parental custody after divorce and make it easier for men
to take multiple wives."

If you put it all together, the numbers from today with the numbers
earlier in the week, you still don't have even half as many women as
turned out to protest the law in Baghdad.

But that Nouri could scare up these 'support rallies' at all?

That goes to the refusal of the Western media to cover this issue and to make it clear that it was illegal and unacceptable.

Marie Harf is a US State Dept spokesperson. She presided over today's press briefing (yes, State finally gave a briefing on Friday). Said Arikat, Al Quds bureau chief, raised the issue of the proposed law.

Said Arikat: Yeah. Iraq?

MS. HARF: Mm-hmm.

Said Arikat: Are you aware of a law that allows parent – fathers or guardians to marry off their 9-year-old girls?

MS. HARF: Yes.

Said Arikat: And what is your comment on that?

MS. HARF: This
is a draft law. We understand that this draft law, which I think
several high-level Iraqi political and religious leaders have publicly
condemned and claim violates the rights of Iraqi women – has been sent
to the council of representatives for consideration. We absolutely
share the strong concerns of the UN mission in Iraq, which has noted
that this law risks constitutionally protected rights for women. The
draft law I think is pending before the parliament right now. It would
require three readings before a vote could take place, so we’ll
obviously be watching the debate closely and welcome a parliamentary
process that ensures the rights of all Iraqis, including women, are
fully protected in line with its constitution.

And I would also note
that some women’s groups, some human rights NGOs, have also condemned
the draft law as a significant step backwards for women’s rights in
Iraq.

When a group in a country is being targeted, if the world rallies to
call it out, it can have an impact. By the same token, silence only
endorses and embraces the targeting. Human Rights Watch deserves strong
credit for weighing in earlier this week with "Iraq: Don’t Legalize Marriage for 9-Year-Olds." Suadad al-Salhy and Reuters reports deserve credit for being the only Western outlet to grasp last Sautrday this was serious and news. (Yes, I know AFP's
Prashant Rao spent Saturday attempting to get a copy of the bill's text
in writing. I know it, so what? AFP didn't report on it -- because
Prashant couldn't get a written copy of the bill. al-Salhy and Reuters
did report on the issue. So we applaud them. No applause for AFP and
they should be glad that it's been too busy of a week for me to connect
this to all the other silences on Iraqi women from AFP.) Iraqi media covered it and deserves credit for that. Rudaw took it seriously and did at least three stories by Tuesday on this issue so they deserve applause as well.

And we'll again note and applaud the United Nations Secretary-General's
special envoy in Iraq, Nickolay Mladenov, for his Tweet last Saturday:

But there should have been a lot more and it's really sad that the State
Dept can't make a statement on it until they're asked about it.

You know what, though? If the State Dept will make their policy on all
countries, I'll be fine with it. If John Kerry, Secretary of State,
will stop threatening various countries and just keep his mouth closed
unless he's asked a question, that might be a good policy. It might
de-escalate some of the tensions in the world right now instead of
ratcheting them up -- something that's especially dangerous when Weak
Barack is the president.

You can play madman of the planet. That's actually a game theory in
international relations. Bully Boy Bush was insane. And the world knew
it as did the US. So he could bully and threaten and everyone knew he
was crazy enough to do it -- to do anything. As the global madman, he
intimidated many.

But Barack's not seen as a madman. That's fine. But is he seen as strong? No.

Which is why he delegates to Kerry to be the mouth piece making threats
(and did so with Hillary Clinton before Kerry). And both are willing to
play this crazy role.

You'll notice the Secretaries of Defense -- Robert Gates, Leon Panetta
and now Chuck Hagel -- have all rejected that role in the
administration. That's because they're smarter than Kerry and Clinton.

Let's move back to Iraq where Friday's big news was the return of Moqtada al-Sadr. Alsumaria reports
the cleric and movement leader has returned to Najaf from Iran and done
so the day before the demonstrations he called for to take place.

Background. Nouri's big mouth ended up tanking his own two-day
conference. For those who missed it, Nouri's fat mouth was flapping
last Saturday insulting many as he spoke to France24. France 24's Mark Perelman interviewed (link is text and video) Nouri for a half hour broadcast which aired Saturday.
In the interview, Nouri's well noted paranoia was on full display as
he repeatedly declared, in the very first two minutes, his alleged
'victory' over those attempting to turn Iraq and Syria into one country
("there are goals to create a one state," "create a state -- one part in
Syria and one part in Iraq"). He continued to gab and began accusing
other countries of supporting terrorism (he was supposedly going to
reveal proof of his gossip in the conference but, as usual, his fat
mouth made empty promises). He also insulted Moqtada.

Moqtada al-Sadr announced his political retirement February 15th. February 18th, he delivered a speech -- CounterPunch posted the speech in full -- emphasizing his decision. February 26th, NINA noted the rumors that Moqtada left Iraq, "The sources noted in a press statement that Mr. Muqtada al-Sadr left
today's afternoon the city of Najaf heading to the Islamic Republic of
Iran in order to complete his religious studies and stay away from the
political scene as he officially announced for all Iraqis."

Now Moqtada had left Iraq. He'd asked his
followers not to protest. And they ceased their protests and heeded
Moqtada's call. But Nouri had to go all bitchy on Moqtada in the
interview,
insulting his intelligence, etc. This led to mass protests all week and
now it's led to the return of Moqtada to Iraq. And to what's expected
to be a very large protest against Nouri on Saturday. Al Mada quotes
Baraa al-Azzawi, with the Sadr bloc, stating that they've implemented
security plans and are expecting a turn out in Dhi Qar of over one
thousand.

Kitabat notes
that Moqtada met, earlier this week, in Tehran with the leader of the
Supreme Islamic Council of Iraq Ammar al-Hakim and the two discussed
issues regarding the planned April 30th parliamentary elections. There
are rumors in Arabic social media that his return will include an
announcement or two regarding the planned elections.

On the topic of the planned elections, Women's e-News notes,
"About 3,000 Iraqi female candidates are preparing to start campaigning
for parliamentary elections, the Arabic-language daily Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper reported March 2.
It's the biggest female participation in an election in the recent
history of Iraq, and the majority of the women are running for the first
time. The Higher Commission for Elections in Iraq asked every party to
have a minimum of 25 percent female candidates on their list."

If Nouri had a brain, he would have kept his mouth shut. If he had, it's doubtful Moqtada would have returned.

March 4th,
we noted an e-mail from an Iraqi MP which stated that Nouri was using
arrest warrants to take out political rivals and that there was one on
Moqtada among others. Dar Addustour reports
today the rumors that Nouri has files on many in Sadr's bloc -- open
files, warrants, ready to be issued. Former prime minister and leader
of the National Alliance Ibrahim al-Jaafari is said to have tried to
reason with Nouri but without success.

In returning, Moqtada avoided Baghdad International by flying from Iran to Al Najaf International Airport.

This allowed him to avoid the prime minister and chief thug of Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki.

Let's wind down on Iraq by remembering Wednesday's snapshot included US
Secretary of State John Kerry bragging about how the Dept is used as a
collection agency, pressuring the government of Argentina to pay of US
corporations. It's interesting when you consider Nouri al-Maliki's
failed conference.

We'll mix in Tweets throughout. Tony Benn passed away today at the age
of 88, just weeks from his 89th birthday (he was born April 3, 1925).
He served in the British Parliament for 50 years and was a member of
the Labour Party. Afterwards, his actions included being the first
president of the UK's Stop the War Coalition.

Stop the War's Lindsey German remembers Benn and notes:The loss of Tony Benn is a loss for our whole movement. He was a
good friend to the Stop the War Coalition, of which he remained
president to the end. One of his last speeches was at the Stop the War
international conference on 30 November 2013. He was a socialist,
someone with a deep commitment to social change, who was principled to
the end.
Tony was from a privileged and highly political background, the son
and grandson of Liberal and then Labour politicians. He would have
become Viscount Stansgate in the early 60s if he had not fought a long
legal battle to renounce his peerage and to continue as an MP in the
House of Commons. This he did, first in Bristol then in Chesterfield.
He became an important minister in the Wilson Labour governments,
standing for deputy leader in 1981 after Labour’s defeat by Thatcher.
Almost uniquely for someone in his position, he moved to the left as
he got older. As an MP he campaigned over a range of issues, supported
the miners during their year long strike in 1984-5, was committed to
equality and women’s rights, was an internationalist who opposed empire
and apartheid, and a socialist. But in my opinion his most important
work came after he left parliament as he quipped ‘to spend more time on
politics’.
This was after the death of his remarkable wife Caroline, a fine
socialist campaigner and author. He dedicated the rest of his life to
campaigning and was absolutely tireless in doing so.

Gary Younge (Guardian) offers, "The two things that stood out, watching him both from afar from an early
age and up close over those few weeks, were his optimism and his
persistence. He believed that people were inherently decent and that
they could work together make the world a better place – and he was
prepared to join them in that work wherever they were."

Charlie Kimber (UK Socialist Worker) shares:A lot of people genuinely loved Tony Benn for his commitment to working class politics and socialism.I was once lucky enough to speak at a meeting with Benn and share a train with him. Throughout the journey people begged for photos or asked him to “speak to my mum on the phone—you’re her hero”.I don’t imagine that happens to Ed Miliband or Ed Balls—or that they are as accessible or friendly as Benn was.Benn had that happy knack that, even though you might have heard the speech many times, it never lost the power to cheer you up.He supported every significant working class struggle in the last 30
years and played a major role in building the Stop the War movement
after 2001. He campaigned across Britain, giving people inspiration and confidence.

UK Channel 4 News grabs a series of his quotes
including, "If you are invaded you have a right to self defence, and
this idea that people in Iraq and Afghanistan who are resisting the
invasion are militant Muslim extremists is a complete bloody lie."

Mark D'Arcy (BBC News) reports, "Benn was a third-generation MP - his grandfather John had served in the
Commons and his father William entered Parliament as a Liberal, served
under Asquith as a Treasury minister and then switched to labour when
the old Liberal party imploded, becoming Ramsay MacDonald's Secretary of
State for India."

[. . .] he raised many issues that are still pertinent, from Britain’s future in
Europe to the primacy of the City of London and the financial industry;
from the threat of rising inequality to the activities of U.S.
intelligence services around the world. (He was forever invoking the
misdeeds of the C.I.A.) He brought a drive and a moral urgency to
politics that is largely lacking today, and, for a while, he
accomplished something that few radicals manage: he created genuine fear
among his enemies, on Fleet Street and elsewhere. To quote Benedict
Brogan, of the Daily Telegraph, “There was a time … when he wasn’t harmless at all, but downright dangerous. That’s what made him such a powerful, memorable force in the history of British politics.”

The Yorkshire Post opines, "There was no one else in his era who so superbly and with such fire led
the left and who so utterly ignored his own personal prospects in order
to get his message across."

Michael White (Pakistan's The Nation) adds, "Throughout his adult life Benn was also a prolific keeper of what became
nightly diary notes, later tape recordings, the basis of eight very
readable volumes of diaries, the last published in 2013 as A Blaze of
Autumn Sunshine. They provided insights into both his happy family life -
married for 50 years to Caroline, an American of similar outlook - and
Benn’s take on the politics of the day, both high and low, plus gossip.
In old age, the diaries were augmented by live performance on stage and
TV, where he was as much a hit in the Tory home counties as in Labour
heartlands. Even his worst enemies did not deny he was an excellent
mimic who could be very funny."

The former West Belfast MP said: "Tony was a true friend of the Irish people."A
principled politician and activist, he spoke up passionately for the
idea of a united Ireland. He remained an avid supporter of Irish freedom
throughout his life."Mr Benn met the Sinn Fein leader on
numerous occasions. He invited Mr Adams to a meeting in 1983 during the
height of the IRA's campaign when the republican party's tolerance of
violence was anathema to most in Great Britain.After
a visit by Mr Adams was blocked in 1993 he correctly predicted that he
would eventually visit Downing Street, to become a regular occurrence
during peace process negotiations under the Blair administration.

Benn voted strongly in favour of gay rights during his time in
Parliament – including the decriminalisation of homosexuality in England
and Wales in 1967.He denounced the Thatcher Government for introducing Section 28 in 1988.The law stated that a local authority “shall not intentionally
promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of
promoting homosexuality” and that schools “could not promote of the
acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship”.Speaking in the Commons, Benn said: “If the sense of the word
‘promote’ can be read across from ‘describe’, every murder play promotes
murder, every war play promotes war, every drama involving the eternal
triangle promotes adultery; and Mr Richard Branson’s condom campaign
promotes fornication. The House had better be very careful before it
gives to judges, who come from a narrow section of society, the power to
interpret ‘promote’.

Wednesday, March 12, 2014. Chaos and violence continue, the assault on
Anbar continues, Nouri trying to create a crop of 9-year-old child
brides gets some press attention, in the US Senator Patty Murray
continues to fight for veterans, in the US House a Subcommittee doesn't
care that the State Dept's budget figures make no sense (not even from
page to page in the budget request), Secretary of State John Kerry plays
at being an 80s super woman, and much more.

There are War Crimes taking place in Iraq as Nouri's assault on Anbar
Province continues. Nouri and his Cabinet approved a bill, now sent to
Parliament, to strip mothers and wives of their rights and to allow
fathers to marry girls off as young as nine-years-old. Elections are
supposed to take place April 30th. The Kurds are refusing to be bullied
by Nouri or his budget threats. Moqtada al-Sadr is standing up to
Nouri. Those are just some of the big issues in Iraq right now.

Okay, that's good. That's needed. The US media has done a lousy job
covering Iraq since their drawdown at the end of 2008 (the US media's
drawdown). So thank goodness Greg Mitchell is making time to seriously
address what is taking place today.

Oh, wait, he's not.

He's jerking off to 2002 pre-Iraq War coverage. He wants you to know
that Judith Miller wasn't the only reporter involved in selling the
illegal war.

Wow, that blows my mind. What acid did Greg hand out with that blog post?

Miller is responsible for her reporting. She is not, however,
responsible for the reporting of others. It's an easy out to act as
though Miller persuaded the nation. The Times does have a reach
but other papers and TV (and radio) do as well. Making her the fall guy
for every bad reporter is letting a lot of people off. Offering that
her story, wavied around by Dick Cheney, silenced dissent means you know
of a Meet the Press rule that I don't. I'm not aware of any rule that Tim Russert has to operate under which says, "If a guest cites the New York Times, the debate is over."Miller
wrote her stories (and Howell Raines was fine with running them -- some
occur under Keller's tenure but the bulk that people complain about are
under Raines' tenure). Hold her accountable for them. But she didn't
anchor and report for Nightly News. NPR didn't offer up an hour or two to her daily to produce, report and star in The Judith Miller Report. Miller wasn't laughing it up with the weather man on Good Morning America before tossing to a breaking report, live from D.C., reported by Judith Miller.I'm not defending her reporting. But there's a tendency to overlook the
others involved. I don't know if that results from people being late to
criticism of the reporting on the lead up to the war or what. It can't
just be a case of "bash the bitch" because there are a number of women
who cheerleaded into war and while one now deceased columnist may get a
pass since she's no longer around, a lot of the reporters are still
around, still on your TV, still on your radio, still in print.

The right-wing website Thy Black Man pointed out today, "Seems like there is rarely a mention of Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistanand Libya
in the mainstream news anymore, and more importantly, from the oral
cavities of U.S. politicians." I doubt the website was asking that Greg
Mitchell indulge in an acid flashback.

That he or The Nation magazine thinks anything he did made a contribution goes a long way towards explain the Death of Independent Media.

Contrast Greg's self-made state of uselessness with this:

The context that kind of led to the situation began over a year
ago -- but essentially with the current present situation a little over a
month ago -- the Iraqi government started shelling the city of Fallujah.
They circled it off and claimed that the city had been taken control of
by ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, a group that was
affiliated with al Qaeda, that they had taken control of the city.The reality is, while ISIS did have a small presence within the city,
the city remained largely under control of the tribes in the area and
of course the people living in the city and so they were trying to deal
with the situation themselves. They did not want those people present in
the city either but nevertheless the Maliki government sealed off the
city, stopped medical supplies from being allowed in, started shelling
the city and as of just a few days ago according to doctors that I
interviewed in the city there were 109 civilians had been killed and 632
wounded including several dozen women and children killed and wounded.

So it’s a crisis situation. It’s ongoing. It’s displaced about
300,000 people around Al Anbar province. The UN has called for an end of
what the Maliki government is doing as have other NGOs operating in the
areas but unfortunately it is ongoing as we speak.

As Dahr rightly
noted in the interview, "The UN has called for an end of what the Maliki
government is doing as have other NGOs operating in the areas but
unfortunately it is ongoing as we speak." The Nation hasn't covered it. The US government hasn't called for an end.

Article
50 of the 1899 Hague Regulations provides: “No general penalty,
pecuniary or otherwise, can be inflicted on the population on account of
the acts of individuals for which it cannot be regarded as collectively
responsible.”

Hague Regulations (1907)

Article
50 of the 1907 Hague Regulations provides: “No general penalty,
pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted upon the population on
account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as
jointly and severally responsible.”

Article
75(2)(d) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “The following
acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place
whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents: …
collective punishments”.

Additional Protocol II

Article
4(2)(b) of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides: “The following
acts against the persons referred to in paragraph I are and shall remain
prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever: … collective
punishments”.

Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone

Article 3 of the 2002 Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone provides: The
Special Court shall have the power to prosecute persons who committed
or ordered the commission of serious violations of article 3 common to
the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 for the Protection of War
Victims, and of Additional Protocol II thereto of 8 June 1977. These
violations shall include:

"Maliki has attacked the people, so the people defended themselves,
rose up and revolted. So it has now been transformed into a revolution,"
Dari said.Since the start two
years ago of widespread Sunni protests, the country's Sunni leadership
has fragmented, and many have become more radicalized. Many tribal
leaders are still allied with the Iraqi government, and the scholars
association and those fighting Iraqi government forces are believed to
represent a much smaller constituency.

Dropping back to yesterday's snapshot:If you ever doubted Nouri al-Maliki's ability to lead, it's on full
display right now. Tomorrow is the big terrorism conference that Brett
McGurk's endlessly praised Nouri for. The State Dept's Brett has
praised this effort to bring the region's countries together to address
the issue.But today comes the news that two won't be participating. NINA reports
Qatar and Saudi Arabia have decided not to participate. This decision
comes after Saturday's broadcast of Nouri al-Maliki's interview where he
slammed Qatar and Saudi Arabia repeatedly. (See Saturday's "Nouri 'celebrates' International Women's Day" and "Iraq snapshot.") He couldn't even keep his big mouth shut until after the conference.

And the fall out just keeps coming. Al Arabiya News reports, "The UAE recalled its ambassador to Iraq on Wednesday in protest against
Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s accusations of Saudi Arabia that the
kingdom supports terrorism." Gulf Times notes:

“Such remarks are false and not based on a
proper assessment of the situation in the region concerning terrorism,
especially as Saudi Arabia plays a significant role in combating all
forms of terrorism,” said Gargash.

Turning to Nouri's attempt to create 9-year-old child brides in Iraq, Human Rights Watch weighed in yesterday with "Iraq: Don’t Legalize Marriage for 9-Year-Olds" and that's already had an impact. RTT notes, "The draft law would cover Iraq's Shia citizens and residents, a majority
of the population of 36 million. It includes provisions that prohibit
Muslim men from marrying non-Muslims, legalizes marital rape by stating
that a husband is entitled to have sex with his wife regardless of her
consent, and prevents women from leaving the house without permission
from their husbands. The law would automatically grant custody over any
child age two or older to the father in divorce cases, lower the
marriage age to nine for girls and fifteen for boys, and even allow
girls younger than nine to be married with a parent's approval."

The suggested Iraqi draft law strips women who belong to the Ja’afari
Shi’a sect of their basic marriage, divorce and inheritance rights, and
worst of all, permits the marriage of nine-year-old girls. One cannot
but be shocked by the delinquency of those who approved the draft law,
and yet here it is now on its way to parliament for approval.

At Rudaw, Ruwayda Mustafah Rabar weighs in on the measure and its meaning:Female
activists in Baghdad gathered at Parliament to protest a proposed
Ja’fari Personal Status Law which will permit the marriage consummation
for girls as young as nine-years-old. The women wore black, to mourn the
regression of women’s rights in Baghdad. It is perhaps strange that
with the fall of Saddam Hussein women’s rights have regressed, as
opposed to progressing. While other countries’ judicial systems attempt
to elevate the status of women by ensuring they are treated equally
before the law, in Baghdad women’s rights violations are sanctified
through the law. What was perhaps the most saddening part of the
protest was the low turnout, the lack of male presence to stand by women
in the fight against patriarchy. Instead, a few women gathered, all of
them were from the ‘older generation’ and they held homemade placards.
It is no surprise that the current political climate in Iraq deters
women, especially young women, from feeling comfortable enough to become
socio-politically active.

Patriarchy is on the rise in Iraq because of the
influx of religious thought which is not only interpreted at the expense
of women’s rights but also heavily influenced by sectarian, as well as
cultural, beliefs. When society fails to recognize the human rights of
women, you would be correct to assume that a higher law, applicable to
all citizens, would enshrine such rights. But unfortunately this is not
the case for Iraq.

Still on violence, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) issued the following today:

The Director-General of UNESCO, Irina
Bokova, today voiced concern for the safety of media workers in Iraq
following the killing of two Iraqi cameramen, Muthanna Abdul Hussein and
Khaled Abed Thamer, on 09 March.

“I condemn the killing of Muthanna Abdul Hussein
and Khaled Abed Thamer,” the Director-General said. “The number of
media workers killed in Iraq is a source of grave concern. I call on the
authorities once again to ensure that those responsible for the death
of journalists be brought to justice. Decisive action is needed to
ensure that the media can carry out their work and the public can remain
informed.”

Muthanna Abdul Hussein and Khaled Abed Thamer, cameramen for Al-Iraqia TV were killed in a suicide bomb blast in a checkpoint at the city of Hilla.

The Director-General has condemned the killing of 18 journalists in Iraq since January 1, 2013.

UNESCO is the United Nations agency with a
mandate to defend freedom of expression and press freedom. Article 1 of
its Constitution requires the Organization to “further universal respect
for justice, for the rule of law and for the human rights and
fundamental freedoms which are affirmed for the peoples of the world,
without distinction of race, sex, language or religion, by the Charter
of the United Nations.” To realize this the Organization is requested to
“collaborate in the work of advancing the mutual knowledge and
understanding of peoples, through all means of mass communication and to
that end recommend such international agreements as may be necessary to
promote the free flow of ideas by word and image…”

Now we're going to note a press release which is really important.
After which, I'll explain about a House Subcommittee hearing today
where the State Dept showed their contempt for the tax payers and the
Congress and the Subcommittee was too busy grinding their own axes to
even note the State Dept budget despite the fact that this was the topic
of the meeting. First though, we're noting this from Senator Patty
Murray's office:

(Washington, D.C.)—Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior
member of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (SVAC), pressed U.S.
Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki and Under Secretary for
Health Robert Petzel on continuing issues at the Spokane VA Medical
Center, including understaffing and budget shortfalls, and critically
needed federal funding for the planned Walla Walla State Veterans Home.

“The Spokane medical center recently prepared a draft response to
questions from the network about their budget. They talk about the
significant challenges of declining budgets, numerous staffing
vacancies, and, leading the network in new veteran patients,”said Senator Murray. “I want to ask you what you and the network are going to do to get Spokane the resources that they do need?”

“I am concerned about the future of the Walla Walla State Veterans
Home, especially because the budget request proposes reducing funding
for state veterans homes grants. These veterans have been waiting a
long time for this facility, and we have more than a thousand veterans
who need care,” said Senator Murray. “So I want to ask
whether the system is correctly prioritizing state home projects – do we
have enough flexibility? And how are we going to ensure that we’ve got
the funds for state veterans homes like Walla Walla?”

Full text of the exchange below:

SPOKANE VA MEDICAL CENTER

Sen. Murray:

“Secretary Shinseki, several times we have discussed my concerns
about getting medical centers the resources they need to provide
top-quality care for our veterans.

“The Spokane Medical Center recently prepared a draft response to
questions from the network about their budget. They talk about the
significant challenges of declining budgets, of numerous staffing
vacancies, and, leading the network in new veteran patients.

“And they said, and I’ll quote it: ‘Overall, senior management is
very aware of the budget shortfall and is taking actions to limit the
deficit. However, most actions will significantly limit staffing levels
and access to care. These actions will have – and have had – a
significant negative impact on morale and will drive some
dissatisfaction amongst patients.’

“Dr. Petzel, I asked you about a similar budget problem at
Indianapolis at the hearing on the 2012 budget, and you told me there
was no evidence that any medical center would be unable to provide the
care we expect. Unless your view has changed, Spokane’s assessment
seems to disagree.

“I want to ask you what you and the network are going to do to get Spokane the resources that they do need?”

Asst. Sec. Petzel:

“Senator Murray, thank you. I am assuming that that’s some employee’s
assessment of the situation, it’s not the senior leadership’s
assessment of the situation.”

Sen Murray:

“It is the senior leadership’s assessment.”

Asst. Sec. Petzel:

“I am not aware of this. We do believe, and the budget was
distributed back in October, and at that time, there was a consensus of
the network directors and the facility directors that they had
sufficient funds.”

Sen. Murray:

“The questions were asked to them by the VISN, and they
responded back, so it was the senior leadership at Spokane VA Center,
saying very clearly they do not have the dollars to be able to do the
duties that they need.”

Asst. Sec. Petzel:

“I will have to go back and talk with both the network and with Spokane. This is information that is new to me.”

Sen. Murray:

“OK, well, their draft response also calls for a discussion about the mission of the medical center.

“It asks if they will remain a full service medical center, and
whether programs and services should be eliminated. That is deeply
concerning to me.

“Are there any plans to reduce services at the Spokane medical center?”

Sec. Shinseki:

“We have no plans to do so.”

Sen. Murray:

“I need you to follow up on that and let me know what’s happening
that they are facing such a budget shortfall, and it was very clear in
the documents that we’ve seen that they are facing an extreme budget
shortfall that is hampering their ability to care for the veterans in
that region.”

Asst. Sec. Petzel:

“We will follow up.”

WALLA WALLA STATE VETERANS HOME

Sen. Murray:

“I also wanted to ask both of you about the Walla Walla State
Veterans Home. As you know, I’m very concerned about that, especially
because the budget request proposes reducing funding for state veterans
homes grants.

“These veterans have been waiting a very long time for this facility, and we have more than a thousand veterans who need care.

“So I want to ask whether the system is correctly prioritizing state home projects – do we have enough flexibility?

“And how are we going to ensure that we’ve got the funds for state veterans homes like Walla Walla?”

Asst. Sec. Petzel:

“Senator Murray, you and I have discussed on numerous occasions the
Walla Walla State Veterans’ Home, and I share your angst about that
particular project.

“We are looking at whether there is a solution that will allow us to
use the 2014 money in order to accomplish that construction but we’re
not finished looking at what the alternatives are.

“Obviously after we’ve done that, and discussed it with the Secretary, we will get back to you.”

Sen. Murray:

“We need to know where that’s going, and overall, not just that one,
but all of them, how are we going to deal with these veterans homes with
declining budgets?

“I think that as members of Congress, we need to know what the need
is and then we need to figure out how to fund it rather than just being
told everything’s OK. I want to know specifically about Walla Walla,
what we’re going to do, but also the funding in general.”

That's the end of the Murray office press release. It's an important
issue, we include it in full and I'll make it its own entry tomorrow.
In tomorrow's snapshot, I hope to cover a hearing I attended today --
but I attended more than one today and we're going with the one that
let's us talk about Iraq.

Secretary of State John Kerry appeared this morning before the House
Appropriations State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs
Subcommittee. US House Rep Kay Granger is the Subcommittee Chair and US
House Rep Nita Lowey is the Ranking Member. Kerry was the only witness
as he begged for money -- tax payer money.

The theme of the hearing was: Let's All Pretend Iraq Doesn't Exist.

I was tipped off to that theme last night by a State Dept friend when I
noted I was going to have to be in two places at once -- the veterans
hearing and the State Dept budget hearing. "Iraq," I was told, "frankly
doesn't matter to him [John Kerry] and he'll only bring it up if
asked."

Looking at the roster of the Subcommittee members, it was obvious that
Israel would be at least the first hour. So I attended 90 minutes of
the veterans hearing (while asking a friend at Kerry's hearing to text
me if Iraq came up).

It did. Briefly in Kerry's opening remarks:

We have kept our funding request in line with what was appropriated to
the Department and USAID in Fiscal Year 2014 within our base request of
40.3 billion. And the additional part of our request for OCO, Overseas
Contingency Operations, totals 5.9 billion. And with OCO funding, we
support programs, as you know, in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, as we
continue to right-size those commitments.

That one sentence was it for his opening remarks.

If you don't get how John Kerry ran from Iraq, notice what he had to say
about the Syrian refugee crisis (and I'm using his prepared remarks
that were marked up by my friend to note the changes between prepared
and delivery):

For the Syrian people, for Lebanon, Turkey, for Jordan, coping with how
to keep their societies running and keep extremists at bay while they
host millions now of refugees, our support is critical to that. We’re
the largest donor in the world. And that helps us, because it is
critical to us that Lebanon and Jordan remain stable.

How do you talk about Syrian refugees and not note Iraq?

The only real mention of Iraq was from US House Rep Frank Wolf who kept
mentioning the Iraq Study Group (which accomplished nothing, a fact Wolf
misses) because he wants a Syrian Study Group and, get this, he wants
US President Barack Obama to ask Bully Boy Bush to head that Syrian
Study Group.

US House Rep Barbara Lee doesn't give a damn about war these days.
Judging by her tired and expanding face, all she cares about is eating.
She didn't even note Ukraine. I walked in when Barbara Fake Ass Lee
was testifying (speechifying? It wasn't questions). I did a double
take. I don't know if she's had plastic surgery or if she had just
pulled her hair back to harshly but her eye brows were up at least a
half inch more than usual and it really did look like a botched face
lift. If so, I'm glad she found a hobby to fill her time now that she no
longer uses it to call out war. And I'm especially glad she looks butt
ugly. In time, you do get the face you deserve and it's sitting on her
neck right now.

Prior to my arrival, the topics were (going by the texts my friend sent
me and his notes) Israel, Israel, Israel, that soda boycott (which Lowey
did not support), Israel, Egypt, Egypt, Israel, Ukraine, Iran, Cuba,
Israel, North Korea, Venezuela -- with the exception of Israel and Egypt
it was basically war requests from members of the Subcommittee --
Democrats and Republicans -- to go to war on these countries. Into that
mix, Babsie Lee offered nothing on peace, just scratched herself a lot
as she babbled on about Uganda (and it's LGBT issues). After I arrived?
War on Argentina because they don't fulfill their debts and even
more nonsense, if you can believe it. It's amazing how this
Subcommittee thinks the answer to everyone of the petty grudges is to
put US boots on the ground.

The US government does nothing to improve the lives of the Iraqi people
-- despite the fact that billions of US tax dollars flow to Iraq for
that supposed purpose.

So what does the State Dept work on?

They're lackeys for corporations. The State Dept works on debt collection -- a fact John Kerry felt was worth bragging about.

Secretary of State John Kerry: With our urging, Argentina has taken
some positive steps. In October they settled a long running investment
dispute with three US companies and implemented -- in January of this
year -- implemented an improved inflation index in order to address
inefficiencies in its IMF reporting and so forth. But we continue to
urge them to fulfill their global, international responsibilities.

US House Rep Debbie Wasserman Schultz wants war on Venezuela and demonized their president right after
Kerry said the Venezuelan government needed to stop demonizing people.
Debbie Washerwoman needs to learn to wash that ratty, oily hair. It
looks like the Exxon Valdez took a dump on her head.

Kerry pulled the little stunt he's so fond of doing since become
Secretary of State -- a stunt he wouldn't have stood for as Chair of the
Senate Foreign Affairs Committee.

See, Secretary John is an 80s power woman in a Nolan Miller dress with
bulky shoulder pads. Secretary John is not just an 80s power woman,
John's an 80s super woman, rushing here, there and everywhere. It's
like a bad movie and he really needs an overweight sidekick (Baraba Lee,
you're being paged!) to pull it off his whole: I'm so busy, I can't
stay for the full hearing, I'm just too important and too busy to appear
before Congress for a full hearing. In other words, John looks like a
real bitch when he pulls this.

What John forgets?

If you pretend you have to leave, then you leave. You don't insist that
everyone be quick and that you'll reply in writing because you're in
such a rush and then go on to yack for 7 minutes straight because you
didn't like a statement a member of the Subcommittee made. He didn't
like the doubts about Barack's foreign policy or Iran and felt the need
to bore everyone with just how yawning inducing he can be ". . . we're
helping Tunisia, we're working on Libya, I just came from a conference
on Libya . . ."

Pretending, in that bitchy manner, that your time's too valuable for
Congress is misguided unless you're looking to add "Bitch" to your
professional title. But what's even worse is pretending you have to go
and then refusing to stop speaking.

It was during this marathon jaw boning that Kerry brought up Iraq for the second time.

Secretary John Kerry: We have inspectors -- not as frequently as the
other two but sufficiently - in Iraq in the plutonium reactor. They are
not able to complete the plutonium reactor.

Well thank goodness for that. They're not able to complete the plutonium reactor.

Except . . .

"They" isn't Iraq.

He said "Iraq."

He meant Iran.

He didn't want to talk about Iraq and a useless Subcommittee didn't want to either.

Iraq's all over the State Dept's FY2015 budget. Let's note some of it.
For the "Overseas Contingency Operations funding," the report notes:

In Iraq, OCO funding of $501.4 million supports operational requirements, movement security,
equipment and associated Operation and Maintenance, physical and technical security, static guards, and
security operations in Basrah and Erbil. The request is $4.4 million above the FY 2014 level and funded
through Worldwide Security Protection, consistent with FY 2014 Congressional action.

That's a half billion right there on Iraq. Right there.

But the useless members of the Subcommittee wanted you to instead know
that they pledge alliegence to the government of Israel, that they want
war on Venezuela's democratically-elected government and that the
grudge-fu**ing of Cuba will never, ever end as long as they draw breath.

A half billion's a lot. It's not all. I told another State Dept friend
I was going to review the budget and he couldn't stop laughing. It's a
fudged budget and it doesn't even add up on paper.

What? I was confused.

He flipped to a table in the back which notes $250 million is the amount
being requested for "Foreign Military Financing" for Iraq.

I was confused still. He flipped several pages and pointed this section out to me:

The FY 2015 Foreign Military Financing (FMF) Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) request of
$537 million is for Iraq and Pakistan. Pakistan ($280 million): Given the ongoing transition in Afghanistan
and continued terrorist attacks
against civilian and military targets throughout Pakistan, FMF is
essential to Pakistan’s efforts to
increase stability in its western border region and ensure overall
stability within its own borders. The
$280 million Pakistan request will enhance the Pakistan Army, Frontier
Corps, Air Force, and Navy’s
ability to conduct counterinsurgency (COIN) and counterterrorism (CT)
operations against militants
throughout its borders, especially in the Federally Administered Tribal
Areas and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, improve Pakistan’s ability to deter
threats emanating from those areas, and encourage continued U.S.-Pakistan military-to-military engagement. FMF will continue to focus on seven
priority areas identified and agreed to with the Government of Pakistan, including precision strike; air
mobility and combat search and rescue; counter-improvised explosive devise and battlefield
survivability; battlefield communications; night operations; border security; and maritime
security/counternarcotics in support of CT aims.Iraq ($267 million): The $257 million requested for Iraq in FY 2015 broadly focuses on helping the
Iraqis improve the capability and professionalism of their military and builds upon the efforts made
since 2003 by the U.S. military, coalition forces, and Iraqi military operations and initiatives. Of the
Iraq request, $7 million will fund administrative costs associated with the Office of Security
Cooperation in Iraq, which also supports implementation of Iraq’s own significant and ongoing
purchases through the Foreign Military Sales program. FMF will help ensure that a strong U.S.-Iraq
relationship is in place as Iraq continues to rely on its own fiscal resources to contribute to peace and
security in the region. The program will focus on the development of enduring logistics capabilities
and institutions to sustain U.S. and Iraqi post-war investments; professionalizing the security forces;
and strengthening the United States' long-term strategic partnership with Iraq.

Do you get that. The table's saying $250 million. The text is saying $267 million.

They don't give a damn.

This is what they turned into Congress.

The figures within the report turned in can't even be reconciled within the report/request itself.

And Congress is so damn stupid that they don't even notice it. (No, I
might not have caught it on my own. But, to the relief of most
Americans, I'm also not a member of Congress so it's not like it's my
job to pay attention to the budget the State Dept misrepresents to
Congress.)

There are 'glitches' like that throughout the report.

This is US taxpayer money and this budget demonstrates how much scorn
the administration has for the American people. They don't even care
that their own figures within the report don't add up.

And they know Congress will spread or bend over (to each their own
desired position) and just holler "Yes!" in an orgasmic orgy of spending
-- of wasting -- the tax payers money.

Can you image a business -- a legitimate one -- turning in a budget that
didn't add up, whose figures said one thing in one section and another
thing in another?

(If you want to crunch numbers, PDF format warning, you can find the budget online here.
You'll find many interesting tidbits such as 1.4 million for Iraq's
"International Military Education and Training," 11 million for
"International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement" and 22.5 million
"Economic Support Fund.")

One thing to remember, something the Subcommittee members all seemed to
forget, this was billed as a "budget" hearing. But outside of two
Democrats whining on behalf of the farmers in their communities, no one
felt the need to even acknowledge the money issues.